Reiss: Chad Jackson released

[Pats726]

I don't claim to be better at this than Belichick, but sometimes amateurs notice mistakes made by experts.

Can we sau arrogant?? It remains VERY much to be seen whether it IS a msiatke or not..you speak about it as a fait accompli.
I also think you have a rather limited understanding of what is important in the pros. You compare Jackson with both Ventrone and Jones, but what you miss in this is their contributions to special teams.To you it is all about the offense; forget special teams...means nothing. In the pros, it is essential for many players to undesrtand and play on special teams. If Chad had been a top rate ST player, I assure you, he would still be a Patriot. That you do not esentially value special teams as important speaks volumes.

Belichick is conceding that Jackson was either a mistaken draft pick (and one traded up for, at that) for the Patriots or a player who's game was ruined by injury.

Those are not the only options as to what happened maybe you should listen to the replay on EEI..or maybe you know better??

There are some great bridges in the desert I'd be happy to sell to those people who think Jackson got 'every possible chance'.

If you have knowledge how this was not so...please state?? I think many here would like to know!!

I also know, from playing, coaching, and watching, and from speaking with those who do all the above, that there are players who simply don't 'get it' until they get the opportunity to apply everything in real games. .

We are talking here about the so called "game day" situation... That is quite true in college..where some athletes are quite gifted and just show up and play and can play way above the riff raff of players...BUT that can not be done in the NFL...the waiver wire is littered with so many who feel that way...some get it together with a wake up call..and hopefully Chad will take that path..but talent alone does not make a player in the NFL..it is THAt simple.

 

[Deus Irae]

Mo, your quote is long, so I'll just excerpt it, no disrespect intended:

Nope, because unlike in this instance neither of us was saying BB would be making a stupid mistake if he went with Gut and I have never accused him of making a stupid mistake. (Except for the time I thought they were f-ing with Tommy's extension but they came to the same conclusion once he voiced displeasure with that process and that got a deal done PDQ...) I may disagree with his approach (to players, though I understand he is not willing to stroke guys because he wants self starters to whom winning and not stroking matters) and occasionally I'm right about reading misfits, but I take that for what it is, a good instinctive gut based guess. I'm wrong about those more often than he is right. I never thought he'd take on Moss...but I didn't pitch a fit when he did because I assumed he believed they could make that work. I approach this differently from some.

I have never claimed to be better at this than Belioli. Even during the draft, when I was going on about drafting a tackle, I acknowledged that BB would likely be right, because he usually is. However, this is a message board. It's here for people to give opinions and have discussions. If it was just to get news, people would simply get RSS feeds. Message boards would not be needed. It would be an idiotic and boring place if every post in every conversation went along the lines of "Well, that was an unexpected move, but BB did it, so it must have been the right move. I can't really talk negatively (or positively, for that matter) about it, because I don't have all the information available to me that BB does.". We opine based upon the body of knowledge we have available to us. That's what these sites are about.

The part that Chad is missing is not something you can develop. You can refine it and build on it but if you don't have it to begin with you will never get it. Don't need it in all systems, but it's mandatory here. Guys with a lot less talent or physical tools who have IT will almost always trump guys who don't have IT here. Just ask Drew.

What 'part' is it that you claim Jackson is missing, and where is your proof of this? What is "IT"? Is he really missing "IT", whatever it is, or is "IT" perhaps just a weaker part of his game? Is the lack of "IT" something that could have been adapted to by the coaching staff, or something that is fatal to the team offense? Given that he has showed an ability to get open against 2nd and 3rd stringers, is "IT" something that is only needed against 1st stringers?

PS Bill also said yesterday that where you are drafted should play no role in team building decisions. They cut a 4th rounder last season because they knew he couldn't make it here. they kept a 6th rounder on the roster as a 4th string QB in 2000 because for all the tools he lacked there was something about this kids makeup that intrigued them. That would be the nearly impossible to quantify or measure at distance IT.

Bill can make such statements all he wants. He may even believe them, although history (see Klem, Johnson) seems to me to imply otherwise. The reality is that first rounders get different treatment from those in the lower rounds, as can be seen by the almost 100% absence of first season cuts. My personal opinion is that 1st & 2nd rounders should be given every reasonable chance, though not preferential treatment while being given such chances.

 

[mb6592]

Of course you are also entitled to your opinion. However, you should probably learn what 'irony' actually is, since your example is not actually an example of irony.

Jesus, you don't give up.

One of the meanings of irony:

American Heritage Dictionary - (ī'rə-nē, ī'ər-) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. i·ro·nies

Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs...

We might expect you to trust that Belichick (you know, daily camp practices, actually seeing what's hapenning...) made the right decision to cut Jackson, but, alas, you ironically choose not to.

 

[Deus Irae]

Jesus, you don't give up.

One of the meanings of irony:

American Heritage Dictionary - (ī'rə-nē, ī'ər-) Pronunciation Key
n. pl. i·ro·nies

Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs...

We might expect you to trust that Belichick (you know, daily camp practices, actually seeing what's hapenning...) made the right decision to cut Jackson, but, alas, you choose not to - irony.

This was your example:

Irony is someone who is not privy to the inner workings of the team (including the DAILY CAMP PRACTICES) and clinging to the belief that Jackson didn't received a fair shake.

Clearly your definition of irony and your example do not match. Study......

 

[bobmal99]

That is a shocker. CJ Jones must have really impressed. Aiken and Welker must be healthy-ish, too.

I don't know if they impressed so much as they are much more
versitle then CJ ever was. You know BB wants guys
that can play multiple positions, CJ could not, or would not.

Bye bye, CJ you certainly had your chances.

Some people think he still does not know the playbook, nor does he run good pass routes....

 

[arrellbee]

As we all know, you have to be careful how much emphasis you place on statistics. They can be very pertinent or they can be misleading.

In the case of running backs, I tend to put yards per carry in the 'can be misleading' category.

The most important, by far, contribution of the running game is to keep drives alive. Sporadic long runs by themselves are not productive enough.

For example, as a purely imaginary hypothetical, let's imagine a drive with Maroney versus Morris or Jordan.

Maroney runs for 12 yds, 2 yds, 2 yds, and 3.6 yards. Average: 4.4 yards per carry. Results: 4 plays and out.

Jordan or Morris run for 4, 3, 3.2 - 3, 4.5, 2.6 - 2.9, 4.2, 3.2 -
Average: 3.4 yards per carry. Results: 9 plays and the drive continues.

A pretty fair amount of Maroney's 4.4 ypc come from long runs - and there are a lot that are -2, -1, 1, 1.5, 2 etc.

If the name of the game is marching down the field without punting - well ......

"pretty fair amount" is an incredibly vague term. I understand your point here however the only way to get the truth is to actually go back and look at the statistical analysis, breaking down Maroney's runs into groups of yardage.

I do know that Maroney had a 3.96 YPC average last year when removing the two 50+ yard runs from the Miami game. Also without those runs he had 0 runs of 20+ yards. How many 10+ vs. 0-2 yard rushes he had I do not know. Would be interesting to see if anyone around the internet has already broken it down.

Oh, I certainly agree with you completely. Especially that "pretty fair amount" is vague - lol.

I should have made it clearer that I wasn't making a judgement about Maroney as a RB. I was just trying to show that stats by themselves can be misleading.

However, I do have somewhat mixed feelings about Maroney. I glanced back over the play-by-plays of a number of last year's games. He is kind of a 'mixed bag'. And it is SO hard to judge a RB in the Patriots system. I was pleasantly surprised to find a number of games where he appeared to have a solid performance on getting decent yardage on most of his carries. For a couple contrasts:

The first game against the Jets, he had
11, 4, 6, 6, 1, 2, 0, 3, 5, 1, 0, 2, 4, 2, 1, 9, 3, 8, 1, 3
so 8 carries over 3, 8 carries for 2 yards or less, and 2 carries for 3 yards.

In the second game against the Jets, he had
8, 5, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 2, 2, 11, 5, (2 and 1 on goal and short), 3, 2, 4, 4, 5, 4, 9, 3, 2, 6, and 4, 1, 1 at the end of the game.
so that seemed to be a much more even performance.

Of course these are against the Jets.

In the last game against the Giants,
0, 0, 2, -4, 2, 13, 5, -3, 10, 4, 4, 4, 0, 2, 6, -5, 3, 2, 5
So 10 plays of less than 3 yards for a total of minus 8 yards
One 3 yard run
8 runs over 3 yards for 51 yards.
That seems more like an inconsistency type of running.

Just a tiny sample of details that you were mentioning.

Thanks for thoughts.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Mo, your quote is long, so I'll just excerpt it, no disrespect intended:



I have never claimed to be better at this than Belioli. Even during the draft, when I was going on about drafting a tackle, I acknowledged that BB would likely be right, because he usually is. However, this is a message board. It's here for people to give opinions and have discussions. If it was just to get news, people would simply get RSS feeds. Message boards would not be needed. It would be an idiotic and boring place if every post in every conversation went along the lines of "Well, that was an unexpected move, but BB did it, so it must have been the right move. I can't really talk negatively (or positively, for that matter) about it, because I don't have all the information available to me that BB does.". We opine based upon the body of knowledge we have available to us. That's what these sites are about.



What 'part' is it that you claim Jackson is missing, and where is your proof of this? What is "IT"? Is he really missing "IT", whatever it is, or is "IT" perhaps just a weaker part of his game? Is the lack of "IT" something that could have been adapted to by the coaching staff, or something that is fatal to the team offense? Given that he has showed an ability to get open against 2nd and 3rd stringers, is "IT" something that is only needed against 1st stringers?



Bill can make such statements all he wants. He may even believe them, although history (see Klem, Johnson) seems to me to imply otherwise. The reality is that first rounders get different treatment from those in the lower rounds, as can be seen by the almost 100% absence of first season cuts. My personal opinion is that 1st & 2nd rounders should be given every reasonable chance, though not preferential treatment while being given such chances.

Bill gave him every reasonable chance keeping in mind that developing Chad Jackson was less a priority here than winning football games this season. Chad wasn't a first rounder, his contract clearly reflected that.

This reminds me of the good old days when Eddie Andelman used to fill entire shows with the discussion of what Drew was missing, the elusive IT that could not be quantified but was clearly missing in his otherwise impressive skillset. It is that intangible that Brady has. The ability/capacity to think on his feet under pressure, consistently make good decisions quickly, process a myriad of information instantly and retain it forever, switch gears on the fly, adapt to situations seamlessly. Bill has it, and his QB having it would offer little value here if he didn't have weapons who could respond in kind. Moss can, Welker can, Brown could, Branch could, Givens could, heck even Caldwell could on some level. Chad can't. He can learn to do one thing only and it has to fit his skillset. He is physically gifted but can't make all the mental adjustments easily - he has all he can do to run the right route. He can't cover multiple positions. We don't operate that way around here. Players fit the system, not visa versa.

Look, there is nothing wrong with questioning rationales or expressing opinions like saying that makes no sense or I think they blew this one and here is why. Stating they have made a stupid mistake or mistakes in signing or cutting a player based on the limited knowledge any fan or media member posesses or digging deeper holes by arguing Bill must have been confused or is lying in the face of reasonable explanations is pure hubris. He makes mistakes, he even admits them...just not nearly as many as opinionated football fans seem to need to think when they disagree with him.

 

[BradyToMoss]

If LM continues to dance back there waiting for a hole to open up for those 2-yard losses, BB won't hesitate to make the tougher, North/South guy in Lamont Jordan the primary guy and sprinkle LM in on a variety of screens and delayed draws.

Lamont was impressive...........

 

[BradyToMoss]

Was I surprised that Chad wasn't claimed, I almost fell over, I couldn't believe he wasn't claimed given the goods he has.

Crazy Al will sign Chad today and on that team, as bad as those receivers are, I can see Chad instantly becoming the #2 with Walker as their #1. He'll have every chance (now that he's healthy) to prove his worth out West. We'll see what he does with this chance.

In the end, it came down to the immaturity (although it has improved) and lack of smarts (obviously). These reports of Chad eating Froot Loops down in the break room while the entire team is up in a critical team meeting right before the AFCCG in Indy, the reports of this cell phone going hay wire during his interview with Cowher and forgetting his play book when he did show up to the meetings in the end did him in, not his ability.

It would not shock me if he blossoms in silver and black.......

 

[Deus Irae]

Bill gave him every reasonable chance keeping in mind that developing Chad Jackson was less a priority here than winning football games this season. Chad wasn't a first rounder, his contract clearly reflected that.

This is your OPINION. It is not a fact. That's pretty much the whole point.

This reminds me of the good old days when Eddie Andelman used to fill entire shows with the discussion of what Drew was missing, the elusive IT that could not be quantified but was clearly missing in his otherwise impressive skillset. It is that intangible that Brady has. The ability/capacity to think on his feet under pressure, consistently make good decisions quickly, process a myriad of information instantly and retain it forever, switch gears on the fly, adapt to situations seamlessly. Bill has it, and his QB having it would offer little value here if he didn't have weapons who could respond in kind. Moss can, Welker can, Brown could, Branch could, Givens could, heck even Caldwell could on some level. Chad can't. He can learn to do one thing only and it has to fit his skillset. He is physically gifted but can't make all the mental adjustments easily - he has all he can do to run the right route. He can't cover multiple positions. We don't operate that way around here. Players fit the system, not visa versa.

You have no idea what "it" is in the case of Jackson, nor do you know if that's why he was cut. I find it amusing that I'm supposed to be the one without the knowledge since I'm "1,000 miles away", yet you know essentially nothing more than I do but feel you have some justification for telling me I'm wrong. For example, it's possible (I'm not claiming it's likely, just possible) that Jackson's problem is an inability to win the first step battle, which places him in a position of having to do the best he can to get open afterwards. As a young, inexperienced player, it would not be uncommon for him to abandon his route in an attempt to salvage a broken play.

Look, there is nothing wrong with questioning rationales or expressing opinions like saying that makes no sense or I think they blew this one and here is why. Stating they have made a stupid mistake or mistakes in signing or cutting a player based on the limited knowledge any fan or media member posesses or digging deeper holes by arguing Bill must have been confused or is lying in the face of reasonable explanations is pure hubris. He makes mistakes, he even admits them...just not nearly as many as opinionated football fans seem to need to think when they disagree with him.

1.) AS YOU WELL KNOW, I tend to defend BB and the Patriots. What's sad about this thread is that it shows how knee jerk the homers are. I'm far from a negative Patriots poster here, yet a bunch of shills are attacking me for daring to speak out about a move made by Belichick. When the hell did he become omniscient?
2.) If there's nothing wrong with questioning it, stop with the bull**** about "1,000 miles" etc... That's nothing more than an attempt to denigrate my response.
3.) Again, AS YOU WELL KNOW, Belichick lies to the media all the time, be it by omission or by the spoken word. Is every team a good football team? According to BB, they are, and I'm sure they are if you compare them to high school teams instead of other NFL squads. Hell, people here get a kick out of quoting his non-answer answers. Noting that is not hubris. It's like observing that the sun 'rises' in the east and 'sets' in the west. Denying it is willful ignorance, at best.
4.) Given that many people have called signings, just for one example of BB moves, bad signings, based on the limited knowledge any fan or media member posesses,and been correct about them while BB was wrong, you might want to re-think that whole "hubris" position. It happens frequently enough that it's clearly not a miraculous occurrence. The same thing applies to draft picks, just for another example.

Be better than the homers, Mo.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

Be better than the homers, Mo.

Be better than the clowns who think criticism equals objectivity and they know more than a HOF pro HC, DI.

And if after watching this team for a decade or more (I presume at least) you don't know what IT is, or can't or for some reason simply won't acknowledge it's existence, you never will. It's the same for every player, irrespective of position btw. In a nutshell it's mental acuity at game speed. From the QB to the ball boys you won't last long in Foxboro without it... If you have a BB to english translator implanted, and you listen closely, you can generally catch his drift without him trashing his players publicly. Because he will never do that as long as within their own limits they genuinely try.

The road to the NFL is littered with unrealized athletic potential in case you hadn't noticed. Sometimes even when it was given nearly unlimited chances. 9 times out of 10 a guy is what he is once you draft him... the rare exceptions are mismanaged and poorly coached. That doesn't tend to happen here. Mis-evaluated is forgivable since comparing the college game to the pros is nearly an apples and oranges exercise and the combine is a relative waste of time unless you plan to play the game in shorts and t-shirts. Until you get them in your system you can't fully gauge their capacity to adapt and adjust when faced with far more complex schemes and infinitely faster and more talented competition.

 

[Deus Irae]

Be better than the clowns who think criticism equals objectivity and they know more than a HOF pro HC, DI.

I make neither claim.

And if after watching this team for a decade or more (I presume at least) you don't know what IT is, or can't or for some reason simply won't acknowledge it's existence, you never will. It's the same for every player, irrespective of position btw. In a nutshell it's mental acuity at game speed. From the QB to the ball boys you won't last long in Foxboro without it... If you have a BB to english translator implanted, and you listen closely, you can generally catch his drift without him trashing his players publicly. Because he will never do that as long as within their own limits they genuinely try.

I've been watching since the 70's, and I know full well that the ever popular "it" is often not the same for one player as for another. In this case, you don't know why Jackson got cut other than BB's words, and his words were, to be polite, ambiguous. Someone posted an article about a team other than the Raiders bringing Jackson in for a look which had some notions about things being based upon bad initial impressions that were never let go of, just for an example of a different possibility.

The road to the NFL is littered with unrealized athletic potential in case you hadn't noticed. Sometimes even when it was given nearly unlimited chances. 9 times out of 10 a guy is what he is once you draft him... the rare exceptions are mismanaged and poorly coached. That doesn't tend to happen here. Mis-evaluated is forgivable since comparing the college game to the pros is nearly an apples and oranges exercise and the combine is a relative waste of time unless you plan to play the game in shorts and t-shirts. Until you get them in your system you can't fully gauge their capacity to adapt and adjust when faced with far more complex schemes and infinitely faster and more talented competition.

I'll ask you the same basic question I've asked elsewhere. How many 23 year olds who've never had a training camp with their team but have had ACL surgery after their rookie seasons have had more receptions after 2 seasons than Jackson accumulated?

This entire line of back and forth has basically been because I dared to say that the kid should get a full season of opportunity and dared to be a smartass about BB's justification in the process. It's not even a factual argument, for crying out loud.

 

[Pats726]

This is your OPINION. It is not a fact. That's pretty much the whole point.



You have no idea what "it" is in the case of Jackson, nor do you know if that's why he was cut. I find it amusing that I'm supposed to be the one without the knowledge since I'm "1,000 miles away", yet you know essentially nothing more than I do but feel you have some justification for telling me I'm wrong. For example, it's possible (I'm not claiming it's likely, just possible) that Jackson's problem is an inability to win the first step battle, which places him in a position of having to do the best he can to get open afterwards. As a young, inexperienced player, it would not be uncommon for him to abandon his route in an attempt to salvage a broken play.

1.) AS YOU WELL KNOW, I tend to defend BB and the Patriots. What's sad about this thread is that it shows how knee jerk the homers are. I'm far from a negative Patriots poster here, yet a bunch of shills are attacking me for daring to speak out about a move made by Belichick. When the hell did he become omniscient?
.

It's NOT that you are speaking out..it's that you are making little sense.. All you have is calling people homers and shills.. THAT apparently is your answer...call names..THAT is OK...speaks volumes....
You made a very bold statement that suggested that Chad wasn't given every possible chance..When challenged on that have been silent..If you KNOW that wasn't the case explain?
You basically have said it was a large mistake to cut Chad and not CJ or Ray...that he was by far the better player. When told that a large reason for that was that both of those receivers also played special teams and that THAT was quite important in the pro game, there was silence. Apparently THAT was taken into account in Jackson's being cut and I think if he had played ST moe, he woud still be a Patriot.
You also stated how some players are "game day" players and that that was the case with Jackson. When told that some players in college have an ability way above most others and can be "gameday" and that in the pros, that this is hardly true, there was more silence.
Those are some of the reasons why Chad is not here. I wish him well, but it seems that Chad was your binkie and somehow having him cut, has clouded your thinking.

I don't claim to be better at this than Belichick, but sometimes amateurs notice mistakes made by experts

I will answer that this way..as you said.."This is your OPINION. It is not a fact. That's pretty much the whole point." .you answered it as if IT WAS a mistake..proven fait accompli...bottom line..Chad did not succeed in the system here...If he succeeds in another teams program that is good, but it in no way means it was a MISTAKE that he was cut here.
Teams have different systems and situations and hopefully he will find one where he can succeed in.
But calling anyone who is critical of what you have said is a homer..a shill??
you are better than that...

 

[rabthepat]

He got what he deserved...a kick to the curb!!!!!!!!!!

 

[rusH1023]

Was I surprised that Chad wasn't claimed, I almost fell over, I couldn't believe he wasn't claimed given the goods he has.

Crazy Al will sign Chad today and on that team, as bad as those receivers are, I can see Chad instantly becoming the #2 with Walker as their #1. He'll have every chance (now that he's healthy) to prove his worth out West. We'll see what he does with this chance.

In the end, it came down to the immaturity (although it has improved) and lack of smarts (obviously). These reports of Chad eating Froot Loops down in the break room while the entire team is up in a critical team meeting right before the AFCCG in Indy, the reports of this cell phone going hay wire during his interview with Cowher and forgetting his play book when he did show up to the meetings in the end did him in, not his ability.

It would not shock me if he blossoms in silver and black.......

I just think it's tough to say (as you did earlier) that we'll be shown our mistake by it. Maybe he will blossom, but it won't prove anything about what could have been with him here IMO. As Mo said, the player fits the system, not vice versa. arrellbee had an EXCELLENT post about it on page 12 or so -- breaking down his thoughts on route running vs. keying in on defensive holes with the QB, etc. I think it's a little of that, too. Not just immaturity.

 

[PatsFan#37]

Without any inside information, all we are doing is speculating. I think it is interesting and fun to look into peoples opinion about why some of these things occur. If we are just discussing peoples opinions, why are some of us getting angry and calling names?

If you people that like to call names when your disagreed with, have some inside info to offer then share it so everyone here can get educated, otherwise just agree to disagree.